Webcam, Kensington lock slot, 100GB of Google Drive storage for two years

I have two big problems with Chrome OS and Chromebooks as a product category. The first is I think that Chrome OS, while an interesting experiment, is limited by its very nature to a narrow set of use cases (mostly individuals and small businesses who rely overwhelmingly on Google and Google Apps for most of their work). The second problem is price: given how little Chrome OS does, the computers running it have typically been a bit too expensive compared to budget Windows laptops.

Samsung's ARM-based Chromebook helped to address the second point by offering a relatively decent laptop for $249, a much more reasonable price than the $449 Series 550 Chromebook introduced earlier this year. Now Acer has limboed even lower, offering its new Intel-powered C7 Chromebook for just $199. There's no question this laptop, which is simply a rebranding of its $329 Windows-running Aspire One AO756-2641, is being sold at an appealing price. But are the trade-offs inherent to any laptop this cheap worth making?

Body and build quality

This Chromebook is priced at $199, but the build quality is reasonable, definitely not as bad as some $199 and $299 netbooks released over the last few years. It's a bit chunkier than Samsung's ARM Chromebook; it's 1.08 inches thick, up from about 0.66 inches, and weighs three pounds rather than the ARM Chromebook's 2.4 pounds.

As is to be expected, the body is all-plastic—the lid and palm rest are a smooth grey plastic, and the base of the cover is a textured black. The computer is small and tightly-constructed enough that there's not much bending or flexing, even in the display. This isn't build quality that they'll write songs about, but it's quite passable considering the price.

Enlarge/ On the right, a headphone jack, two more USB 2.0 ports, and a Kensington lock slot.

Andrew Cunningham

The laptop's port selection is robust, but not cutting edge. There are three USB 2.0 ports, two on the right and one on the left. USB 2.0 is a bit disappointing, since the laptop's Intel HM70 chipset provides four USB 3.0 ports natively, but it's eminently forgivable in a $199 Chrome OS laptop. Joining the USB ports are a 100 megabit Ethernet port, a VGA port, and an HDMI port, enough to connect the laptop to both networks and external displays new and old. A headphone jack, and a Kensington lock slot round out the cast. While I had some issues getting the ARM-based Chromebook to output video over HDMI when I reviewed it, both the VGA port and the HDMI port worked as intended on the C7. A recent developer channel build of Chrome OS actually enables an extended desktop mode for the first time in the operating system's history. That's something that should trickle down to the stable channel within the next few weeks.

The laptop's biggest sticking point is probably the display, an 11.6-inch 1366x768 number. The color and brightness are actually pretty good. However, as is common in the low-quality TN displays used in low-end laptops, the contrast ratio is bad and the viewing angles are worse. With an 11-inch display you should usually have the room to open the screen as much as you need even if you're on a train or plane. In the case of the C7, this is lucky because looking at the screen from anything other than the optimal angle completely washes it out in a hurry. A stuck pixel on our Google-provided review unit may also be indicative of less-than-perfect quality control on Acer's part, though this is difficult to ascertain from using only one machine.

Enlarge/ The keyboard (mediocre at best) and trackpad (wonderfully unremarkable).

Andrew Cunningham

Enlarge/ The teeny tiny arrow keys are easy to miss and difficult to get used to.

Andrew Cunningham

Not all is rosy with the keyboard either. It's the standard chiclet-style keyboard you'll get in almost any consumer laptop these days. As you'd expect from the C7's price point, the keyboard is decidedly mediocre and has decent key travel but with a bit of a mushy feel. The worst thing about it might be its layout, but the problems go beyond Acer's weird-shaped return key. The single biggest issue is definitely the arrow keys, which are half-height horizontally as well as vertically. This renders them tiny and difficult to touch-type if you're used to standard arrow key layouts.

The trackpad is a standard-issue buttonless multitouch affair. Clicking and dragging, using two fingers to right-click, and other motions like two-finger scrolling all worked as intended. I didn't have any issues with palm rejection or unresponsiveness. These sorts of trackpads are only noteworthy if they don't work properly and, at least in my usage, I found the C7's trackpad to be pleasantly unremarkable.

Finally, the C7's heritage as a Windows laptop makes it slightly different from other purpose-built Chromebooks. The Caps Lock key is still a Caps Lock key rather than a Search key—instead, a Search key is located where the Windows key would be on a standard PC keyboard. There's also no hardware "developer switch" to disable the secure bootloader. On the C7, you can access developer mode by pressing the escape key, the F3 key, and the power button at the login screen to enter restore mode, then Ctrl and D to toggle developer mode.

Enlarge/ The share the same screen size, but the chunky C7 is hardly a MacBook Air.

Andrew Cunningham

Compared to the ARM Chromebook, Samsung's offering is slightly thinner, lighter, and more attractive, though the screen quality is about the same as the C7. It's also fanless, which is preferable to the C7's single, sometimes whiny system fan. However, the C7 has the better selection of ports, and as we'll see, it actually outperforms its more expensive cousin in most meaningful metrics.

Share this story

Andrew Cunningham
Andrew wrote and edited tech news and reviews at Ars Technica from 2012 to 2017, where he still occasionally freelances; he is currently a lead editor at Wirecutter. He also records a weekly book podcast called Overdue. Twitter@AndrewWrites

56 Reader Comments

Only interested if I can use that unlocked boot loader to boot one of those $40 Windows 8 upgrades and have a $239 ultra-portable (or $259 for a second 2GB SODIMM). Can I do that? (edit: I mean, I know the boot loader can be unlocked using directions in the review, I just want to know if it'll just boot a standard Windows installer from a USB thumbdrive)

Only interested if I can use that unlocked boot loader to boot one of those $40 Windows 8 upgrades and have a $239 ultra-portable (or $259 for a second 2GB SODIMM). Can I do that?

Do you have a spare Windows 7 retail (not OEM) license hanging around that you're not using?

If not, it would be a license violation to install the Windows 8 upgrade. It can only be installed on a machine with a Windows 7 license. For a new home-user machine that shipped without Windows 7, this would mean a full retail license.

Only interested if I can use that unlocked boot loader to boot one of those $40 Windows 8 upgrades and have a $239 ultra-portable (or $259 for a second 2GB SODIMM). Can I do that?

Do you have a spare Windows 7 retail (not OEM) license hanging around that you're not using?

If not, it would be a license violation to install the Windows 8 upgrade. It can only be installed on a machine with a Windows 7 license. For a new home-user machine that shipped without Windows 7, this would mean a full retail license.

I think you are right, but I am interested to see if other operating systems are possible. Ubuntu maybe?

I have a Cr-48 and have been using ChromeOS since early in the beta. I like it, and it makes sense for some situations. A couple of thoughts:

First, don't expect a ChromeOS system to do everything that a Win/Linux system is going to do. It doesn't need to; it's meant to work within a web-based cloud environment to do things that we all do, every day, from within our browsers. What's more, because of how the OS works, it is PERFECT for older or less computer literate people who just want to surf the web and use email. It would also be ideal for a classroom environment (I'm a teacher, I know this).

Second, I understand that Acer is just repurposing an existing windows-based machine, but imagine what replacing the 320gb spinning drive with a small (30gb would be more than enough) SSD would do for battery life, for what would probably be a comparable cost (actually less, there are a bunch of 32GB SSD's for $50 and the Samsung HD is $60 on the egg)...and who knows, perhaps that $10 savings could put a better screen in this? At any rate, it would dramatically improve battery life.

Holy crap! This is cheaper, faster, and has a larger screen than my Atom-based netbook! I'd get it just to have a faster netbook. Maybe put in an SSD for longer battery life.

That's a pretty good idea. I had the same plans for my old AMD-based netbook. (My only processor rule is to NEVER buy Atom.) I put down $20 to get more (and faster) RAM and I was ready to get an 80 GB SSD. It was an Acer too, and they really do give you one-screw access to the guts. Easiest mods I ever made.

You could go with an even smaller SSD on this machine, since it's a Chromebook.

What does everyone think the chances would be of flashing the stock Windows model bios onto this thing? Then dealing with the Chrome secure bootloader wouldn't be an issue and it would essentially be a Windows-less (and much cheaper) version of the other model?

Holy crap! This is cheaper, faster, and has a larger screen than my Atom-based netbook! I'd get it just to have a faster netbook. Maybe put in an SSD for longer battery life.

SSDs are better than disk based drives in almost every way, but you probably won't see any huge gains in battery life. Your biggest gains will just be due to things like seeking being much faster with an SSD (and "spinning back up" doesn't happen at all, obviously). Disk operations take less time, so power consumption will be lower, but when the SSD is in use, you don't really save anything. You really shouldn't expect more than 10-20% gain in battery life. Most of the difference between this and the ARM machine should be due to the processor and chipset.

What does everyone think the chances would be of flashing the stock Windows model bios onto this thing? Then dealing with the Chrome secure bootloader wouldn't be an issue and it would essentially be a Windows-less (and much cheaper) version of the other model?

I've spent a little time trying to do just that, without much success at this point. I hope to have a follow-up article about installing alternate OSes on it done for next weekend, if I can spend enough time tinkering in between higher-profile stuff. :-)

Yes, it is a lot bigger, but Win 8 a lot more capable than Chrome OS, even with the Metro crap. The combination of cheap Android tablets and cheap Windows laptops has really made the Chromebooks pretty pointless for most people. They are the Google+ of mobile devices - if you see someone using it, they are probably a Google employee.

Only interested if I can use that unlocked boot loader to boot one of those $40 Windows 8 upgrades and have a $239 ultra-portable (or $259 for a second 2GB SODIMM). Can I do that? (edit: I mean, I know the boot loader can be unlocked using directions in the review, I just want to know if it'll just boot a standard Windows installer from a USB thumbdrive)

The Chromebook's BIOS doesn't allow booting from non-Chrome OS media, but I'm digging into this to see what's possible.

These would be perfect for school-age kids. Small enough to fit in a book bag, secure and malware-free, free Google apps work fine for homework and playing a few simple games, and inexpensive enough that it's not a major disaster if it gets dropped or kicked or juice gets spilled on it.

For grownups, I question whether many people need another device in their lives that's neither a full-featured laptop nor a tablet.

Only interested if I can use that unlocked boot loader to boot one of those $40 Windows 8 upgrades and have a $239 ultra-portable (or $259 for a second 2GB SODIMM). Can I do that?

Do you have a spare Windows 7 retail (not OEM) license hanging around that you're not using?

If not, it would be a license violation to install the Windows 8 upgrade. It can only be installed on a machine with a Windows 7 license. For a new home-user machine that shipped without Windows 7, this would mean a full retail license.

Technically this is true, but unless you are a business that has to worry about keeping the Microsoft licenses in order, you really don't have to be concerned with what the fine print on the Microsoft license says. I've never heard of a case of Microsoft going after a non-business user over using an upgrade copy instead of a full version, and they have even made it childishly easy to take an upgrade copy and make it a full version by allowing you to upgrade the upgrade copy you cleanly installed on the hard drive with complaint. They also left a huge backdoor open on the Win 8 Upgrade program that allowed a lot of people to get an upgrade copy for $15. For home users, as long as they get some money from you, I don't think Microsoft really gives a rats ass if you use the correct license or not for your own personal usage.

I was going to ask how they were making a profit at 199, but that's even more ridiculous. I'm guessing the gateway is loaded with preinstalled trial software to add $30ish in extra revenue for them. I'm still curious if the Acer has some other sort of revenue that's subsidizing that low price.

What does everyone think the chances would be of flashing the stock Windows model bios onto this thing? Then dealing with the Chrome secure bootloader wouldn't be an issue and it would essentially be a Windows-less (and much cheaper) version of the other model?

I've spent a little time trying to do just that, without much success at this point. I hope to have a follow-up article about installing alternate OSes on it done for next weekend, if I can spend enough time tinkering in between higher-profile stuff. :-)

I thought you might have attempted it based on the reference to a follow-up article about installing alternative OSes. I would imagine someone will figure out how to re-flash the firmware eventually. I wouldn't be surprised if it requires someone to write or modify some sort of utility software to do so though.

What does everyone think the chances would be of flashing the stock Windows model bios onto this thing? Then dealing with the Chrome secure bootloader wouldn't be an issue and it would essentially be a Windows-less (and much cheaper) version of the other model?

I've spent a little time trying to do just that, without much success at this point. I hope to have a follow-up article about installing alternate OSes on it done for next weekend, if I can spend enough time tinkering in between higher-profile stuff. :-)

I thought you might have attempted it based on the reference to a follow-up article about installing alternative OSes. I would imagine someone will figure out how to re-flash the firmware eventually. I wouldn't be surprised if it requires someone to write or modify some sort of utility software to do so though.

Yeah if I had one of the Windows versions of this laptop (the Aspire One 756 I think) there might be something I could do, but at least as far as I can tell the BIOS downloads from the Acer support page aren't quite enough to cut it. I'm sure it'll be a matter of time though, unless they changed more than just the keyboard and the firmware when they made the AO756 into the C7.

I don't see anyone buying this to run Chrome OS. They'll buy it to save $130 over the version with identical hardware running Windows, and then throw Windows on it themselves, most likely a pirated copy.

I don't see anyone buying this to run Chrome OS. They'll buy it to save $130 over the version with identical hardware running Windows, and then throw Windows on it themselves, most likely a pirated copy.

Yes, it is a lot bigger, but Win 8 a lot more capable than Chrome OS, even with the Metro crap. The combination of cheap Android tablets and cheap Windows laptops has really made the Chromebooks pretty pointless for most people. They are the Google+ of mobile devices - if you see someone using it, they are probably a Google employee.

Because not everyone wants a 15" laptop. Too big to be easily portable, too small to do real work. Thats why ~13" laptops are successful, and use an external monitor when you are desk bound. For the most part you get similar resolutions, so you don't lose screen real estate, but you do gain portability. 15" also try and put in the extended keyboard, but don't have the space for it, so end up being more cramped than a 13" without keypad.

Plus I've had to deal with other peoples crappy ~$200 15" laptops, and I have never found one that was build to last longer than a month. Buy that Gateway and you'll be in for a lot of disappointment, at least this Chromebook come with low expectations, and the screen hinge might be around in 6 months.

Because not everyone wants a 15" laptop. Too big to be easily portable, too small to do real work. Thats why ~13" laptops are successful, and use an external monitor when you are desk bound. For the most part you get similar resolutions, so you don't lose screen real estate, but you do gain portability. 15" also try and put in the extended keyboard, but don't have the space for it, so end up being more cramped than a 13" without keypad.

QFT. I just got an 11.6" laptop--Acer Aspire that was being clearanced for 175 bucks (one-725 model). I could have gotten a 15" laptop for about the same amount but why would I? It's big enough that lugging it through an airport is a bit of a pain but still too small for good typing, etc. This 11" thing, while even smaller, is at least *really* portable when the need arises. Right now it's set up in the nursery so my wife can have movies and music while feeding the kiddo, but it isn't like we don't travel, and having something that's really portable is nice. And while I like tablets, they just aren't there yet, for me.

A laptop that costs $1500 has a 1366x768 display that is completely ignored by the reviewer.

A laptop that costs $200 has a 1366x768 display that the reviewer highlights as a horrible thing.

I think the Ars reviewers need to sit down and talk about realism in hardware, and come to some kind of consensus as to what kind of hardware one should expect at various price ranges.

I don't think the author is complaining about the screen having a resolution of 1366x768. On an 11" screen, that's quite reasonable. He's complaining more about the picture quality, the viewing angles and contrast ratios. I'll admit that I've not spent much time with the 11" Macbook Air but what time I have spent with it, it seems to me that the viewing angles on them are pretty good.

Overall, this is a very fair review of the C7 Chromebook, pointing out both strengths and weaknesses.

However, it overlooks one of the biggest advantages of the C7 over the Samsung ARM Chromebook: expandable RAM. Chrome OS is very constrained with 2gb of RAM, and many people are reporting issues with pages being discarded/reloaded when they try to use more than 2-3 tabs. The C7 can take advantage of up to 16gb of RAM, completely eliminating this problem. In addition, Chromebooks with Intel processors can use zRAM swap, which dramatically reduces the discarding problem. zRAM swap is not supported on ARM Chromebooks. Because of this and other functional issues, I would pick any Intel Chromebook over the ARM model at this time.

As the reviewer correctly writes, swapping out the 320gb HDD for a SSD does little for performance other than startup/shutdown, and also does little for battery life. Of the two possible mods, increasing RAM will have — by a large amount — the most impact on performance. Since the C7 has a removable battery, one answer to the shorter battery life would be to carry a spare battery, which is what I did for years with other laptops until battery life recently improved.

Only interested if I can use that unlocked boot loader to boot one of those $40 Windows 8 upgrades and have a $239 ultra-portable (or $259 for a second 2GB SODIMM). Can I do that? (edit: I mean, I know the boot loader can be unlocked using directions in the review, I just want to know if it'll just boot a standard Windows installer from a USB thumbdrive)

The Chromebook's BIOS doesn't allow booting from non-Chrome OS media, but I'm digging into this to see what's possible.

I bought one of these to load Linux Mint on - it should be arriving by the end of the week. I can let you guys know if I'm successful or not.

These would be perfect for school-age kids. Small enough to fit in a book bag, secure and malware-free, free Google apps work fine for homework and playing a few simple games, and inexpensive enough that it's not a major disaster if it gets dropped or kicked or juice gets spilled on it.

For grownups, I question whether many people need another device in their lives that's neither a full-featured laptop nor a tablet.

Agree on the school-age kid laptop. Might actually consider one for a nephew of mine.

But! This is almost a perfect "mom" laptop. Small, lightweight, and most importantly malware-free. Now instead of getting calls about bugs from emails or facebook she can happily look at all the cute pictures of cats she desires.

For someone who likes a keyboard and can't quite grasp a touchscreen (or would likely have trouble when trying to type on one) this is a great item. I'm not saying all "moms" are this way but I know mine would have trouble with a iPad/Android tablet.

A laptop that costs $1500 has a 1366x768 display that is completely ignored by the reviewer.

A laptop that costs $200 has a 1366x768 display that the reviewer highlights as a horrible thing.

I think the Ars reviewers need to sit down and talk about realism in hardware, and come to some kind of consensus as to what kind of hardware one should expect at various price ranges.

The fact that you can buy 6 of these things for the price of the comparison laptop... Yeah I think there is something wrong with this comparison....

Where are you seeing a comparison with the 11" MacBook Air?

Other than showing you the relative size, the C7 is being compared with the $249 Samsung ARM Chromebook as you would expect. A poor quality screen and comparatively bad battery life is exactly what I would expect at this price point but it's worth reminding potential buyers about potential issues.